Comments on: Ooh, it makes me wonder http://www.jakeshapiro.com/2006/09/05/ooh-it-makes-me-wonder/ ...blogs sometimes. Wed, 10 Feb 2010 02:42:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: John Proffitt http://www.jakeshapiro.com/2006/09/05/ooh-it-makes-me-wonder/comment-page-1/#comment-521 John Proffitt Sun, 10 Sep 2006 07:14:38 +0000 http://www.jakeshapiro.com/2006/09/05/ooh-it-makes-me-wonder/#comment-521 One of your last points/questions centers on the issue of sponsorship vs. listener support -- is one or the other better or possible or not possible. I recommend contacting Doug Kaye, the creator of the all-podcast Conversations Network (originally started as IT Conversations). He's been building a donation-based system for some time, in which listeners are exhorted to give money freely for an essentially free (and niche) service. But that model has not paid off (pun fully intended). Now he's angling for a sponsorship model, as are other prominent national podcasters (check out Leo Laporte's work as well). Sponsorship seems to be the model that's working. The public has learned that the Internet is free, but they have to give up some attention to advertising to get the free stuff. That model, distasteful and risky though it may be to "public" players, may very well be the only sustainable one. Finally, on a broader point, we're really dealing with a three-tiered system that we must address to be successful in serving the public and raising enough money to continue doing so... [1] We must operate 24x7 streamed services that meet the audience in two ways: first, scheduled along with their daily lives (drive time, weekend errands, evening channel surfing) and second, designed to capture the audience serendipitously. We must meet people where they are when the are and still have enough quality content leftover to catch the audience at unexpected times to please and intrigue and engaged them. [2] We must operate on-demand services that extend our 24x7 streams past the set schedule, allowing folks to get more of what they love and shift the schedule around if they have a life that doesn't gel with our own schedule plan (you can't please all of the people all of the time). [3] We must provide a multifaceted overlay system to the two systems above in as simple and powerful a way as possile. This is so far called "curating," but it's much more than that. The curating model is "we're smart , here's what we've found, we'll provide it and you'll be enlightened." This is a top-down structure. It has its place (though it's already represented in the 24x7 stream) and shouldn't be ignored. Museums have curators for a reason. But we must also provide interactive tools that allow users to organize content for themselves and organize it for one another within the community. It's a combined "organize my media according to my preferences" system and a Digg-style self-curating system rolled into one. I can easily imagine a streamed Internet version of our station that is organized via the power of the audience -- they pick the stories, the shows, the music, the content that gets played out in a "power to the people" version of our main streams. Anyway, overlaid on all of this content and service is sponsorship, membership, community "investment" and just plain media sales (physical media, downloads, subscriptions, etc.), all paying for the entire service. Complicated? You bet. The alternative -- and it may very well be a viable alternative -- is to hunker down and carefully shrink as media outlets and formats proliferate. Perhaps just being a good terrestrial radio station is indeed enough and though you might shrink somewhat, there may very well be an operational sweet spot somewhere in there. One of your last points/questions centers on the issue of sponsorship vs. listener support — is one or the other better or possible or not possible. I recommend contacting Doug Kaye, the creator of the all-podcast Conversations Network (originally started as IT Conversations). He’s been building a donation-based system for some time, in which listeners are exhorted to give money freely for an essentially free (and niche) service. But that model has not paid off (pun fully intended).

Now he’s angling for a sponsorship model, as are other prominent national podcasters (check out Leo Laporte’s work as well). Sponsorship seems to be the model that’s working. The public has learned that the Internet is free, but they have to give up some attention to advertising to get the free stuff. That model, distasteful and risky though it may be to “public” players, may very well be the only sustainable one.

Finally, on a broader point, we’re really dealing with a three-tiered system that we must address to be successful in serving the public and raising enough money to continue doing so…

[1] We must operate 24×7 streamed services that meet the audience in two ways: first, scheduled along with their daily lives (drive time, weekend errands, evening channel surfing) and second, designed to capture the audience serendipitously. We must meet people where they are when the are and still have enough quality content leftover to catch the audience at unexpected times to please and intrigue and engaged them.

[2] We must operate on-demand services that extend our 24×7 streams past the set schedule, allowing folks to get more of what they love and shift the schedule around if they have a life that doesn’t gel with our own schedule plan (you can’t please all of the people all of the time).

[3] We must provide a multifaceted overlay system to the two systems above in as simple and powerful a way as possile. This is so far called “curating,” but it’s much more than that. The curating model is “we’re smart , here’s what we’ve found, we’ll provide it and you’ll be enlightened.” This is a top-down structure. It has its place (though it’s already represented in the 24×7 stream) and shouldn’t be ignored. Museums have curators for a reason. But we must also provide interactive tools that allow users to organize content for themselves and organize it for one another within the community. It’s a combined “organize my media according to my preferences” system and a Digg-style self-curating system rolled into one. I can easily imagine a streamed Internet version of our station that is organized via the power of the audience — they pick the stories, the shows, the music, the content that gets played out in a “power to the people” version of our main streams.

Anyway, overlaid on all of this content and service is sponsorship, membership, community “investment” and just plain media sales (physical media, downloads, subscriptions, etc.), all paying for the entire service.

Complicated? You bet. The alternative — and it may very well be a viable alternative — is to hunker down and carefully shrink as media outlets and formats proliferate. Perhaps just being a good terrestrial radio station is indeed enough and though you might shrink somewhat, there may very well be an operational sweet spot somewhere in there.

]]>